The Zinger at the UN

[Abdul Alhazred]

..
The Zinger says unilateral actions undermines the UN (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080418/ts_nm/pope_usa_dc).

Well that's right, but he says it like it's a bad thing.

http://i31.tinypic.com/307xbph.jpg

Does he practice that look in the mirror every morning?

[Tsukasa Buddha]

My only big problem with the UN is the Security Council.

But generally I don't see why people (Usually on the "right") are such whiny *****es about it. Oh noes, the richest country in the world contributes the most!

[The Fool]

at least when Abdul is whining about the UN it gives him a break from whining about Muslims :)

[Abdul Alhazred]

Jawohl, Sarge.

[Abdul Alhazred]

Great to know that the "progressives" are on the same side as the Pope.

[Abdul Alhazred]

It's not about the size of the "contribution". It's about using the money to promote starvation slavery and mass murder.

Like Zimbabwe "sustainable development" or Sudan "human rights".

Or child sex abuse by UN "peacekeepers"? At least the pedophile priests aren't armed.

[Abdul Alhazred]

But it's all acceptable collateral damage in the cause of feeling smugly superior to a bunch of whiny Yanks, right?

[Abdul Alhazred]

Never mind the UN apologists.

Get a load of the creepy look on the Zinger's face. :eek:

[UserGoogol]

Great to know that the "progressives" are on the same side as the Pope.

I disagree with the Pope on a lot, but that doesn't mean I have to be disagree with him on every thing. I think that giant hats are awesome, and I think that unilateral action undermines what good the UN can do. (While not particularly undermining the bad things you mention.)

Never mind the UN apologists.

Get a load of the creepy look on the Zinger's face. :eek:

Everybody knows the Pope looks like Emperor Palpatine. It's really not worth even mentioning at this point. Bush is dumb, the Pope is creepy looking, these are jokes that nobody should make, and those who do are worse than the child molestors at the UN. :)

[mrbaracuda]

Talking to yourself much, Abdul? ;)
So let's see what we got so far for the pope.

- the rat
- rat-nazi
- zinger

Keep 'em coming folks!

[a_unique_person]

Talking to yourself much, Abdul? ;)


Don't get him started on railways. :cool:

[Abdul Alhazred]

I'm in too good a mood to call him Ratzi the Nazi right now.

So The Zinger it is.

[gumboot]

I agree, unilateral action undermines the UN. I protest unilateral action by nations such as the USA. How dare they think to independently undermine the UN. Undermining the UN is solely the domain of the UN itself. No one else should have the right to do so. And let's face it, great as the USA is, I'm sorry, but the brutal truth is you cannot compete with the UN in regards to undermining the UN.

Compared with the Olympian efforts of the UN over the last 50 years or so, your invasion of Iraq looks amateurish and clumsy.

Leaving ruining the UN to the professionals please.

[a_unique_person]

I agree, unilateral action undermines the UN. I protest unilateral action by nations such as the USA. How dare they think to independently undermine the UN. Undermining the UN is solely the domain of the UN itself. No one else should have the right to do so. And let's face it, great as the USA is, I'm sorry, but the brutal truth is you cannot compete with the UN in regards to undermining the UN.

Compared with the Olympian efforts of the UN over the last 50 years or so, your invasion of Iraq looks amateurish and clumsy.

Leaving ruining the UN to the professionals please.

The USA under Bush has done a perfectly good job of undermining itself.

[gumboot]

The USA under Bush has done a perfectly good job of undermining itself.


I agree. But this thread's about undermining the UN, not the USA. Please stay on subject.

(And for what it's worth, having the USA undermined is far less hurtful to nations such as my own than having the UN undermined).

[Abdul Alhazred]

Leaving ruining the UN to the professionals please.

http://skepticalcommunity.com/phpbb2/images/smiles/BigGrin3.gif

[Abdul Alhazred]

Serious question for non-US pro-UN types: Do you think it would be bad for you if the US got out of the UN?

I do not think so.

[Gurdur]

I think Abdul Alhazred was far more interesting when he did trains, not this repetitive crap instead.

[gumboot]

Serious question for non-US pro-UN types: Do you think it would be bad for you if the US got out of the UN?

I do not think so.


What do you mean by "pro-UN"?

I am pro-UN in that I support the idea of the UN, I think it's a good idea, and I think it has the potential to make a huge difference for good in this world (to be fair to the UN I think it has made a huge difference for good in this world).

However I am less that happy with the current direction of the UN, and it's increasing refusal to stand behind its many admirable and idealistic declarations and back them up with action.

I am also not an American.

And I believe that if the USA left the UN it would be very, very bad for the UN and very, very bad for small nations such as my own.

[Abdul Alhazred]

New Zealand, right?

Why would the US getting out of the UN be bad for New Zealand?

I'm not arguing, I'm trying to understand the reasoning.

[Darth Rotor]

New Zealand, right?

Why would the US getting out of the UN be bad for New Zealand?

I'm not arguing, I'm trying to understand the reasoning.
Consider who sits on the Security Council. If the US splits, what dipsticks would take that place on the UNSC? How does that influence NZ's security position in the Pacific Rim, where the biggest dog on the Western end is China?

Not too hard to do the math, is it?

DR

[Abdul Alhazred]

OTOH, if the US pulled out of the UN, the UN would become less important. Maybe to the extent that it would not matter who was on the Security Council?

If China threatened New Zealand and the USA didn't like it, I fail to see how going through the UN would help matters.

As long as there are diplomatic relations all around, there can always be negotiation. So who needs the UN?

The UN as a force to moderate the military actions of major powers sounds like a great idea, but it pretty much failed in 1950 (Korean "UN police action"), and was never tried since.

And that was in an era when the UN as an organization was not corrupt.

[Dragoonster]

I agree, unilateral action undermines the UN. I protest unilateral action by nations such as the USA. How dare they think to independently undermine the UN. Undermining the UN is solely the domain of the UN itself. No one else should have the right to do so. And let's face it, great as the USA is, I'm sorry, but the brutal truth is you cannot compete with the UN in regards to undermining the UN.

In fairness to the UN, the US did make a lot of hash over its relevancy prior to the Iraq war. We based at least one of our clever multifaceted argument over Resultion um, 1441? and others, and Bush did say he'd present a final resolution just prior to invasion to the SC. Right after Powell's ridiculous presentation at it. He didn't, the Iraq invasion was unpopular, is unpopular, and may have been a huge failure. All that with Bush threatening the UN with it being irrelevant if it didn't support us. Some countries I'm guessing probably did choose to not be part of our coalition due to how we interacted with the UN, Blix's team, etc. So, at least in the recent UN-US smartness race, I'd say the UN came out on top. I guess not deciding to invade something doesn't make some body relevant, though it might make it better.

I'm pro-UN btw, just to confirm my bias. It's of course largely useless currently except as a political litmus test, which is why every country needs to send it a 10% gdp tax so it can build a military. j/k. kinda.

[Darth Rotor]

OTOH, if the US pulled out of the UN, the UN would become less important. Maybe to the extent that it would not matter who was on the Security Council?

If China threatened New Zealand and the USA didn't like it, I fail to see how going through the UN would help matters.

As long as there are diplomatic relations all around, there can always be negotiation. So who needs the UN?

The UN as a force to moderate the military actions of major powers sounds like a great idea, but it pretty much failed in 1950 (Korean "UN police action"), and was never tried since.

And that was in an era when the UN as an organization was not corrupt.
Abdul, are you forgetting that GHW Bush got the UN behind him in the 1990-1991 Persian Gulf War? Where do you think all those sanctions and support came from?

DR

[Abdul Alhazred]

Not forgetting anything. If there's one thing in US foreign policy I criticize in every administration, it's not getting out of the UN.

After about 1975 or so, there's no excuse. Not that it was a good idea before that.

Anything we should have done could have been done better without the UN.

Sure past administrations as well as the current one have tried to get some sort of diplomatic advantage from the UN. Always a mistake, at best.

[Abdul Alhazred]

A forthright repudiation of the UN would work wonders.

Why should we be part of an anti-freedom alliance? Because it served some cynical purpose during the Cold War, it's now a law of nature or something?

[fuelair]

I agree, unilateral action undermines the UN. I protest unilateral action by nations such as the USA. How dare they think to independently undermine the UN. Undermining the UN is solely the domain of the UN itself. No one else should have the right to do so. And let's face it, great as the USA is, I'm sorry, but the brutal truth is you cannot compete with the UN in regards to undermining the UN.

Compared with the Olympian efforts of the UN over the last 50 years or so, your invasion of Iraq looks amateurish and clumsy.

Leaving ruining the UN to the professionals please.Might as well, they have indeed been doing it for years!!:)

[ceo_esq]

Returning to the OP topic of the pope's visit to the UN, the Holy See's website has now posted the complete text of his address to the General Assembly here (http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2008/april/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20080418_un-visit_en.html).

[Darth Rotor]

A forthright repudiation of the UN would work wonders.

Why should we be part of an anti-freedom alliance? Because it served some cynical purpose during the Cold War, it's now a law of nature or something?
The UN is not a moment of inertia, it's six decades of inertia.

DR

[Just thinking]

Never mind the UN apologists.

Get a load of the creepy look on the Zinger's face. :eek:

I know, it's like he's saying to himself ... "hee hee hee, little do they know that I'm really the Devil!"